jure wrote: Craigy wrote:
gruntguru wrote:Turbo inertia is of little consequence as far as harvesting is concerned ie the rotational kinetic energy of the turbo/MGUH would be equivalent to a fraction of a second at 120 kW.
Citation needed. How do you know what Mercedes did?
If they chose to make the MGUH/Turbine/Compressor/shaft assembly out of tungsten-weighted flywheels, it'd be an additional energy store...
And it would be extremely hard to control speed of rotation. It would accelerate and decelerate very slowly. There would also be cog consequences. Ice would also get quite a lot of back pressure because it would take time to spin the assembly.
It would also take a *relatively* long time for the assembly to slow down under load, as compared with a compressor with limited intertia.
If the compressor/turbine/MGUH/shaft had high rotational inertia, it could act as a secondary (additional to the ES) store of energy -- but importantly that kinetic energy is not counted in the 2MJ/4MJ ES transfer rules.
You could potentially spin it up under braking using direct power from the ERS-K and then dump that energy back into the ERS-K directly on corner exit. There's no limitation on energy transfer between those two items (ERS-H and K)
It'd be nice to see someone doing the sums on a flywheel going from (for example) 60,000RPM to 125,000RPM and back again, in terms of energy transfer.
Edit: did some quick sums. With total guesses: (5KG rotating mass, 50000rpm delta, 15cm diameter flywheel) you come to 192KJ, or about 10% of the ES transfer limit per lap... but this would potentially apply more than once per lap.
Can someone please shoot a hole in this for me? (ideally with numbers, rather than just "because").